Investigation of the curative effects of Hypericum perforatum (St. John's Wort) and Rosa spinosissima (Black rosehip) on rats in an indomethacin-induced gastric peptic ulcer model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, histopathological and immunohistochemical evaluations were made on the damage to the gastric tissue in the gastric peptic ulcer model induced by indomethacin, and it was investigated whether the plants Hypericum perforatum and Rosa spinosissima have a therapeutic effect. In order to create an ulcer model, 25mg/kg indomethacin was administered orally to the rats in the other groups, except the sham control group, in 2 doses, 24 hours apart. In the treatment groups, the first dose of indomethacin was given an hour after the second dose, and the second dose of plant oils was given orally 24 hours later. Then, 1 hour later, the rats were sacrificed. In the histopathological evaluation, sections belonging to the indomethacin control group showed intense degeneration of both epithelial and mucosal glands in the gastric mucosa. Edema and bleeding were also present in the lamina propria and submucosa layers. These observed damages were significantly reduced in the RS+HP-1 and RS+HP-2 groups. As a result of the immunohistochemical evaluations, it was observed that the group with the highest Bax immunoreactivity was the indomethacin control group, and the groups with the lowest were RS+HP-1 and RS+HP-2. It was determined that the group with the lowest Bcl-2 immunoreactivity was the indomethacin control group, and the groups with the highest were RS+HP-1 and RS+HP-2. The results showed that Hypericum perforatum and Rosa spinosissima plants have therapeutic and anti-apoptotic effects on gastric injury.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".